This afternoon I received a text message from one of my good friends in Nebraska. He is a progressive Democrat that I often talk shop with, and I have been recently bullying him because he acted as a volunteer observer for the Obama camp in Iowa a few weeks back. Here is the text message:

"Do or die in NV and SC for John. If no wins, he must clear the way!"

Pretty simple and to the point, eh? Well, let me tell you that this really set me off. Ever since late December, I have listened from the Obamanians and Clintonites and their push-from-the-top message that has hinted to a speedy exit from Senator John Edwards in order to clear the way for progress. Most of these comments come from people that are merely drinking the Kool-Aid of the respective camps, and haven't actually worked for a campaign (or even phone-banked or canvassed for a cause in the past.) Aside from the casual idealists, I have also heard from seasoned veterans that have urged me to pass up my support for Edwards for a more level-headed approach. A more level-headed approach, in their opinion, would be to allow Obama and Clinton to slug it out in celebrity fashion with little damage to their messages--on a clear path toward a united front by the end of the spring going into the summer/fall convention cycle. Their voices of reason echo sentiment based upon an ideal opportunity to look united in the face of a weakened Bush Administration and a scattered Republican presence on the road to the White House.

Here are my thoughts:

Why should I, or anyone else, roll over for the Obama and Clinton machines? What is so special about their messages or their candidacy that takes away from a distinguished and still quite eligible candidate in Senator John Edwards? Do the thousands of votes, countless endorsements, and declared delegates---in the face of NO media coverage by the national outlets---mean anything to Democratic leadership and traditional campaign veterans?

Over the past 2.5 years, when these candidates were "honing" their message at the pulpits of the U.S. Senate, John Edwards was carrying his message of hope, hard work, and change to Americans in their communities. John was standing with striking and locked-out workers on picket lines across the country, helping raise funds for local poverty shelters, and establishing a national center for poverty research in North Carolina. Where were Senators Obama and Clinton? Aside from wining and dining with celebrities that lined their velvet pockets with future campaign funds, they were in the U.S. Senate (where they had pledged to the American people to stand up to the Bush White House and turn things around for the country.) Now, I do not want you to think I devalue the candidacy of Obama and Clinton because of their service as legislators, but I do seem to remember the Democratic-controlled House and Senate rolling over like weak puppies on the issue of continued funding to the Iraq blunder. I do not remember Obama and Clinton doing anything but give a strongly-worded speech against the process in the Senate chambers. No, they wouldn't dare stick their necks out too far right before the electoral process began. They went on record as being opposed to Bush recommendations, and then hurried to the airport to go raise money and give interviews to Rolling Stone, Vibe, People, etc.

I have heard Obama and Clinton both claim that they will be able to provide consistently strong leadership for the American people if they were President of the United States of America, but they ducked for cover when the opportunity arose in the U.S. Senate.

So, what do I suggest? I suggest that Senator John Edwards continues his fight to the White House. There have only been two Democratic processes so far, and John is still in this conversation of change. I want him to have the opportunity to force real conversation at the Democratic convention this fall, and hopefully force delegates to carefully consider their voting choices when the ballots circulate for roll call. A process like that is good for America, and the Democratic Party.

I want a President of the United States of America that truly understands the benefits of progressive social work in our local communities, wants to help the middle class family at tough times (not just when it is politically convenient), and has enough respect for global relations to stay involved in conversations abroad (even after he left the U.S. Senate to run for president in 2003-2004.) John Edwards is moderate voice for progressive change in the United States, and I will not waiver in my support for him. I only wish I had the time and money to work every single day for him on the trail.